P-ISSN: 2808-5957
E-ISSN: 2808-6724
ijoms.internationaljournallabs.com
533
ANALYSING THE STUDY OF ORGANIZATIONAL JUSTICE CONFIGURATION
AND SOCIAL MODAL ON SATISFACTION AND COMMITMENT
Heru Kurnianto Tjahjono
1
, Yuliza
2
Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta, Indonesia
1
herukurnianto@umy.ac.id
2
yulizamuslimin28@gmail.com
Abstract
This study is a critical review of an article written by Heru Kurnianto Tjahjono, Olivia Fachrunnisa, and Majang
Palupi and had published in the International Journal Business Excellence 2019, 17(3): 336-360 under the
heading of “ Configuration of organizational justice and social capital: their impact on satisfaction and
commitment”. The purpose of this study is to explain individual behavior in evaluating distributed justice and
procedural justice. The method is done by reviewing a number of literature related to the topic of the article. The
result indicates that contextual aspects, such as distributive justice, procedural justice, and social capital, play a
large role in elaborating satisfaction and organizational commitment. Future studies are important to conduct a
broader review of the impact on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in different contexts such as
different industries, among different workers generations, and other demographic factors.
Keywords: organizational justice; social capital; satisfaction; commitment
This work is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
INTRODUCTION
This study is a literature review of the research of Heru Kurnianto Tjahjono, Olivia
Fachrunnisa, and Majang Palupi and is published in the Journal of International Business
Excellence in 2019, 17(3): 336-360 with the title "Configuration of organizational justice and
social capital and its impact on satisfaction and commitment".
This study of the impact of organizational fairness on individual behavior, in general, has
been conducted using experimental methods. Experimental design to look at the impact of
employee behavior on a variety of artificially designed contexts. This study aims to analyze
whether social capital both moderates the organizational impact on job satisfaction and
organizational commitment. Supporting research in the writing of literary studies is a meta-
analysis of Coluitt et al (2001), McFalin (1993) states that distributive justice has a significant
effect on individual satisfaction while procedural justice has a significant effect on organizational
commitment.
Other researchers who predict the impact of fairness, social capital, organizational
satisfaction, and commitment do not necessarily require empirical support (Bawling and Philips,
1993; Tang and Baldwin, 1996; Tjahjono, 2010, 2011). Importance in considering subjective
factors in the model of organizational justice (Harris et al, 2004; Tjahjono, 2014).
The research used in this literature review in which the researcher uses experimental methods
that can be interpreted as a systematic and scientific approach in which the researcher manipulates
one or more variables. This method involves as many as 247 subjects categorized into two groups,
Analysing the Study of Organizational Justice Configuration and Social Modal on Satisfaction and
Commitment
534 Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(2), February 2022
namely high social capital and low social capital. 124 in high social capital and 123 in low social
capital. Group selection was randomized among the groups and researchers tested only one effect
at a time.
The subjects of this study were students in the 1st and 3rd semesters of business management
majors and grouped randomly into four classes, the first class acted as lecturers with high
distributive and procedural fairness in a class collection. Second class, acting as a lecturer of high
distributive justice and low procedural justice. The third class acts as lecturers who have
distributive justice and high procedural justice and the last class acts as lecturers with low
distributive and procedural justice.
Satisfaction and Commitment
Organizational commitment is created if satisfaction is obtained in the organization.
Satisfaction of work conditions related to the magnitude of job challenges faced, the attitude of
superiors, and the existing supervision are determining factors of organizational commitment.
Some researchers related to satisfaction and commitment show that employee behavior
perceptions related to satisfaction with a job are important predictors of organizational
commitment. So it can be said that satisfaction has a positive influence on organizational
commitment (Kenku and Ogunkuade, 2020).
Organizational Justice
Why is the influence of distributive justice more dominant on individual satisfaction than
procedural justice? (Sweeney and McFarl in, 1993) in a two-factor model that maintains that
twisted justice tends to have a positive influence on outcomes associated with a personal evaluation
of individual satisfaction. Conceptually, it is due to distributive fairness, which is related to the
little results employees get from the organization (Folger and Konovsky, 1989).
Distributive justice is based on the exchange theory and welfare theory that explains that
employees have prosperous motives and motives for exchange (Tjahjono, 2010). The practice of
fairness will relate to a number of work outcomes, compensation, and welfare.
Procedural justice is the employee's perception of the fairness of the mechanism or process
of the presence of a number of results that they harp (Tibaut and Walker, 1978; Lind and Tyler,
1992; Tyler and Blader, 2003). Both concepts of justice play an increasingly central role in the
studies of organizational justice and the consequences to be faced (Colquitt, 2001; Tjahjono, 2008;
2010; 2011).
A survey conducted by Christie et al. (2015) that there are several education personnel who
show that employee trust in the organization can be achieved through organizational fairness. The
fairness of justice has a positive effect on employee job satisfaction (Oze1 and Bayraktar, 2017).
Organizational fairness that demonstrates as a moderating variable on the relationship between
incentive behavior and incentive perception (Shoaib and Baruch, 2017). The higher the
organization of justice in the organization, the higher the organization's results from job
satisfaction.
Analysing the Study of Organizational Justice Configuration and Social Modal on Satisfaction and
Commitment
535 Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(2), February 2022
Social Capital
Researchers must remember that social capital can outline social dilemmas in the judgment
of justice with respect to an individual's internal conflicts whether to maximize his or her personal
interests or sacrifice personal interests to build teamwork. Manning's research (2017), states that
social capital plays a role in conflict through knowledge management so that it impacts the
improvement of an organization's reputation; social capital is the ability of individuals to work
with others to achieve certain goals through interactions, beliefs, norms, and rules, thus forming a
new work of social attachment relationships. In addition, Maturer-Watanabe et al. (2017) found
that social capital creates mutual trust between members of organizations, thus aiding in a fair
decision-making process through organizational virtue and self-management in achieving work
achievement. Social capital also creates a network of cooperation between members to foster spirit
and compassion through increasing trust, justice, and economic welfare in SME cooperation
(Brink, 2015).
Kostova and Roth (2003) mention that social capital will make individuals tend to work
harder to maintain their social relationships or focus on financial factors. Low social capital will
cause employees to work on their financial factors. This perspective is related to the situation of
social dilemmas in each individual. Where when faced with the choice of maximizing social
interests or personal sacrifices, among them will choose social interests. Individuals who have low
social capital are most likely to choose the first option, which is more on their personal interests
and low motivation in social capital so social interests are sometimes ignored both socially and
socially in a group (Chua, 2002).
Based on the point of view of distributive justice, low-cap socially capitalized societies focus
on short-term financial needs. So it can be said, with the change in the perception of distributive
justice, the level of commitment will also change.
Hypothetical Model
Figure 1.
Model of Justice, Social Capital, Satisfaction, and Commitment
METHOD
This literature review deals with fairness, social capital, organizational satisfaction and
commitment. An experimental method is a systematic and scientific approach to research in which
Analysing the Study of Organizational Justice Configuration and Social Modal on Satisfaction and
Commitment
536 Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(2), February 2022
researchers manipulate one or more variables, and control and measure any changes in other
variables.
The control group in the study where the subjects had been randomly assigned among the
groups, and the researchers tested only one effect at a time. It is usually done to be able to predict
phenomena. It is also built to be able to explain some kind of causation. Experimental research is
important to society or organizations because it helps us improve the working lives of everyday
organizations.
Hypothesis testing (moderation effect) using the ANOVA test. As suggested by Kuehl
(2000), when the moderator variable is categorical (low and high) we can estimate a model
analogous to ANOVA. This is usually used if we are interested in comparing the average effect
size of a group to two or more groups. Using the one-way random effect ANOVA model, we
calculated the average effect size and standard errors for each group, and then tested whether these
averages differed significantly from each other. Furthermore, the average effect size and standard
errors require an estimate of the variance component. In this study, we believe that variations
between studies differ between groups.
ANOVA testing is seen in the reputation of authors and some journals that are referenced.
Some of the journals that are referenced include international journal business excellence, the
international journal of arts and social science, and springer journal.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The results showed that distributive fairness is low and high that differ depending on the
manipulation. Therefore, low and high procedural fairness differ significantly. Empirical results
of satisfaction testing obtained using the Levene test showed that the social capital of variant
homogeneity was not met, but this was not an issue as long as the sample size was proportional.
The study also concerned a second social capital that addressed randomized assessments in each
group. Likewise, the normality of social capital does not affect ANOVA outcomes, which remain
strong (Ghozali, 2005).
Organizational fairness and job satisfaction demonstrate that distributive fairness and
procedural fairness play an important role in elaborating individual satisfaction. The results
showed that distributive justice had a more significant influence in laying out individual justice
than procedural justice. The results show that the interaction of distributive justice and social
capital has a positive influence, more research is needed using plots and descriptive statistics to
investigate significant interactions (distributive justice and social capital) by separating them into
sub-samples of social capital value (Gibson, 2001).
When social capital becomes a moderating variable, two types of justice are empirically
supported. Specifically, it is explained that the impact of distributive fairness on individual
satisfaction is positively stronger in those with low social capital. Post Hoc individual satisfaction
test Results of Post Hoc satisfaction tests are shown below. Based on the results of the Post Hoc
test, the pattern of interaction of distributive justice, procedural justice and social capital in general
differs markedly in elaborating individual satisfaction.
Analysing the Study of Organizational Justice Configuration and Social Modal on Satisfaction and
Commitment
537 Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(2), February 2022
High distributive justice interaction patterns - high procedural fairness Post Hoc test results
show that there is no role of social capital moderation on the impact of distributive fairness and
procedural fairness on performance assessment satisfaction; The results are statistically
insignificant. While the pattern of distributive justice interactions is high - low procedural fairness
Post Hoc test results show that there is no role of social capital moderation on the influence of
distributive justice and procedural fairness on performance assessment satisfaction. The results are
statistically insignificant.
Low distributive justice interaction patterns – high procedural fairness Post Hoc test results
show that there is a role of social capital moderation on the impact of distributive justice and
procedural fairness on satisfaction (p = 0.001). Satisfaction in sub-samples with high social capital
was higher than in sub-samples with low social capital. While the pattern of interaction of
distributive justice is low - low procedural justice Post Hoc test results show that social capital has
a moderating role in the impact of distributive justice and procedural fairness on satisfaction (p =
0.01). In this pattern of interaction, those with high social capital were more satisfied than those
with low social capital.
Empirical results of satisfaction testing were obtained using the Levene test, which showed
that the social capital of homogeneity variants in the data was not met; but the sample size is
proportional (Ghozali, 2009). The impact of fairness on organizational commitment supports the
argument that distributive justice and procedural fairness have a significant effect on
organizational commitment. The results showed that the role of distributive justice was more
dominant in elaborating organizational commitments.
The moderation of social capital to the organization's commitment is carried out by observing
the interaction of distributive justice - social capital and procedural justice-social capital. The
results showed that the social distributive-capital justice interaction was significant at p=0.001 and
the procedural-social capital justice interaction was significant at p=0.001. Further investigation is
conducted using descriptive plots and statistics to evaluate the relationship between distributive
justice and social capital, as well as between procedural justice and social capital, by separating it
into high-low sub-samples (Gibson, 2001). The results showed that social capital moderates the
impact of distributive fairness on organizational commitments. In particular, the impact of
distributive fairness on organizational commitment was positively stronger in those with low social
capital than others with high social capital.
The results showed that both distributive fairness and procedural fairness play an important
role in explaining satisfaction and commitment. The role of each of these types of justice is in line
with the perspectives of McFarlin and Sweeney (1992) and Sweeney and McFarlin (1993) and has
a lot of empirical support (Colquitt et al., 2001; Masterson et al., 2000; Badawi et al., 2017).
However, some previous studies have not supported the conception of two types of models
(Barling and Philips, 1993; Tang and Baldwin, 1996; Tjahjono, 2010, 2011).
Sweeney and McFarlin (1993) are aware of limitations in their research. The main problem
they criticize is that the model they propose should include more complex variables. Thus, a
possible research opportunity is to test the moderation variables. Their perspective was later
Analysing the Study of Organizational Justice Configuration and Social Modal on Satisfaction and
Commitment
538 Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(2), February 2022
sharpened by Harris et al. (2004), who stated that the perspective of an individual's subjective
judgment should be considered in the formulation of the model. The heuristic theory of justice
explains that people will not be able to obtain complete information. In assessing the fairness of a
policy. The unavailability of objective information causes people to subjectively judge justice. In
general, the results of this study support the perspective of an individual's subjective judgment.
CONCLUSION
The results of the study rose on consensual studies, research methods, and research contexts.
Thus, distributive justice is dominant in explaining organizational satisfaction and commitment.
Similarly, proper social capital illustrates how justice explains workplace satisfaction. If there is a
change in the perception of distributive justice then the level of commitment will also change. This
phenomenon describes that a low social capital society will be more sensitive when it comes to
economic interests and influences commitment.
REFERENCE
Badawi, Tjahjono, H.K. and Muafi. (2017). The role of corporate reputation moderation of banking
services. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 15(1), pp.15-25.
Barling, J. and Philips, M. (1993) Interactional justice, formal and distributive justice in the
procedural justice: an exploratory study. The Journal of Psychology, 649(8), pp.1-4.
Brink, T. (2015). Passion and compassion represent dualities for growth. International Journal of
Organizational Analysis, 23(1), pp.41-60.
Christie, AM., Jordan, P.J. and Torth, A.C. (2015). Trust antecedents: Emotional intelligence and
perceptions of others. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 23(1), pp.89-101.
Chua, A. (2002). The influence of social interaction on knowledge creation. Journal of Intellectual
Capital, 3(4), pp.375-392.
Colquitt, J.A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of
measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), pp.386-400.
Folger, R., and Konovsky, M. (1989). Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to
pay raise decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 32(1), pp.115-130.
Ghozali, 1. (2009). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program SPSS. Semarang: Badan
Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Gibson, C. (2001). Me and us: Differential relationships among goal setting training, efficacy and
effectiveness at the individual and team level. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(7),
pp.789-808.
Harris, M.M., Lievens, F. and Hoye, G.V. (2004). 1 think they discriminated against me: using
prototype theory and organizational justice theory for understanding perceived
discrimination in selection and promotion situations. International Journal of Selection and
Assessment, 12(1-2), pp.54-65.
Analysing the Study of Organizational Justice Configuration and Social Modal on Satisfaction and
Commitment
539 Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(2), February 2022
Heru K.J, Majang P. (2017). Catatan Tentang Studi Keadilan Distributif, Komitmen, Afektif dan
Dampaknya Pada Perilaku Retaliasi. Jurnal Riset Manajemen dan Bisnis. 12(2), pp. 121-
128.
Kenku, Aa, & Ogunkuade. (2020). IM Public-Private Organisation Differentials in Relationship
of Leadership Styles, Job Satisfaction and Organisational Commitment in Nigeria.
Jassjournal.com, https://ijassjournal.com/2020/V3I4/4146575881.pdf
Kostova, T. and Roth, K. (2003). Social capital in multi-national corporations and a micro-macro
model of its formation. Academy of Management Review, 29, pp. 297-317.
doi:10.5465/AMR.2003.9416356
Lind, E.A. and Tyler, T.R. (1992). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York:
Planum.
Manning, P. (2017). The social capital concept in management and organizational literature.
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 25(5), pp.875-893.
Masterson, S., Lewis, K., Goldman, B.M. and Taylor, M.S. (2000). Integrating justice and social
exchange: the differing effects of fair procedures and treatment on work relationships.
Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), pp. 738-748.
McFarlin, D. and Sweeney, P. (1992) 'Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of
satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes', Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 35, No. 3, pp.626-637.
Ozel, A. and Bayraktar, C.A. (2017). Effect of organizational justice on job satisfaction. In Calisir,
F., and Akdag, C.H. (Eds.): Lecture Notes in Management and Industrial Engineering
Springer, pp.205-217.
Shoaib, S. and Baruch, Y. (2017). Deviant behavior in a moderated-mediation framework of
incentives, organizational justice perception, and reward expectancy. Journal of Business
Ethics, August, pp. 1-17
Sweeney, P.D. and McFarlin, D.B. (1993). Workers' evaluation of the 'ends' and the 'means': An
examination of four models of distributive and procedural justice. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 55, pp.23-40.
Tang, T.L. and Baldwin, L.J. (1996). Distributive and procedural justice as related to satisfaction
and commitment. SAMAdvanced Management Journal, 60(4), pp.25-31.
Thibaut, J. and Walker, L. (1978). A theory of procedure. California Law Review, 66, pp. 541-
566.
Tjahjono, H.K. (2010). Manajemen Berkeadilan. Pidato Pengukuhan Guru Besar Universitas
Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta.
Tjahjono, H.K. (2011). The configuration among social capital, distributive and procedural justice
and its consequences to individual satisfaction. International Journal of Information and
Management Sciences, 22(1), pp. 87-103.
Tjahjono, H.K. (2014). The fairness of organization’s performance appraisal, social capital and the
impact toward affective commitment. International Journal of Administrative Science and
Organization, 21(3), pp. 173-179.
Analysing the Study of Organizational Justice Configuration and Social Modal on Satisfaction and
Commitment
540 Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Science, 2(2), February 2022
Tyler, T.R. and Blader, S.L. (2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social
identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), pp. 349-
361.
